It must be so disappointing for journalists lately. They have tried, since September, so very very hard to write a "Liberal Party imploding with dissenssion" narrative and it always seems to just fall so very flat.

First there was the Newfoundlanders voting against the budget, but they've towed the line ever since and have never spoken out against Michael. Tough luck for the journalist.

Then there was the Coderre thing. Yet, the party didn't implode and he's come back into the fold.

Then we had the rumours of three MPs - that's THREE MPs!!!, in case Duffy wasn't audible enough - crossing the floor. How long can Iggy last with such caucus infighting and implosion?!?!? What? It was a made up story by the Conservatives?

Then there was a few MPs voting against the gun registry. Ooooh, here was evidence of deep party friction and dissenssion. What? Not this even? They just voted based on constituent desires?

Then there is this obsession with some Liberal MPs who oppose the HST. Aha! We have it now. The Liberal Party and Igatieff's leadership can't withstand this assault and rebellion. We got him now!! What? Dosanjh just shrugged and said they tried to convince caucus but didn't so they move on? No one storming out of caucus? No rumours of floor crossings but instead assurances they will be voting with the party? Damn, what kind of implosion is this? The Liberals are so out of it now they don't even know how to infight anymore!!!

Notice how throughout all of this that Mr. Anonymous Liberal has not reappeared? Notice how throughout all of this equivalent "dissension" stories in the Conservative ranks - the many Tory MPs speaking out against the HST and saying their government doesn't support the HST, for example - are ignored?

Does it seem at all like some are trying to force some disparate thin facts into a preconceived narrative?

To me, it says more that there are some bumps whenever you change direction and speed, different voices wanting the party to go different directions. But overriding that is a sense of purpose: we must stay together and get going, get skating. The bumps in the road are felt most at low speeds as you are gearing up.

Not sure what you thought I was saying but your response seems to indicate you didn't bother reading what I wrote.

The media are trying to push a narrative that the Liberal Party caucus is full of dissent and on the verge of implosion. The facts show they are quite unified as a caucus. Despite some disagreements on specific issues they are working their way through, those different views are not dissension.

As for allowing to vote their conscience and free voting... the CPC is the very last party to provide any commentary on that. Is Harper going to allow a free vote on HST do you think? Not with the even bigger dissension within his caucus on this issue that the media choose to ignore. Would he allow a free vote on the gun registry (the same gun registry, by the way, that Harper voted in favour of back in 1995)?

What was that promise about every vote a free vote except budgets and main estimates back in 2006? Must be something wrong with my memory - and that of the media - for no one to be talking about such a blatant and brazen broken promise.

Ted I read your post, the LPOC and CPC are not the same party or share many traits.

Voters can see them as well as they turn away from the MSM spin.

Can you explain how a minority gov't without any natural allies allows free votes and survives?

Secondly the lack of discipline and backstabbing by the LPOC is based on facts that I will not repeat provide the numerous links. Denying that history of infighting and intercine is silly. Ask John Turner, Jean Chretien, Paul Martin, Sheila Copps.

The list is too long. The LPOC took flak when MI noted he admired the communications strategy and discipline of the CPC.

"Can you explain how a minority gov't without any natural allies allows free votes and survives?"

Make it clear that only budgets and main estimates are matters of confidence instead of making every single bill of any degree of importance a matter of confidence. Sorta like he promised.

But if you take your view, can you explain to me why he made the promise then?

"Secondly the lack of discipline and backstabbing by the LPOC is based on facts that I will not repeat provide the numerous links. Denying that history of infighting and intercine is silly. Ask John Turner, Jean Chretien, Paul Martin, Sheila Copps.

Your comment is what is silly. And it misses the very point. I thought you said you read what I wrote.

The media is trying to force a narrative of backstabbing and internecine warfare within the caucus. They tried and tried to make it seem like it was a continuation of past intra-party camps until it was just so patently obvious that the Turner-Chretien-Martin camps and warring was no more.

What backstabbing and internecine warfare is there now to support the narrative? Disagreements are not dissension. Coderre is almost an example, except he always maintained his issue was with staff and not Iggy. And now the staff is gone.

The media is just scrambling to come up with a narrative for Ignatieff and are trying to force one despite the facts. Harper tried with "just visiting" but that hasn't really taken except the kool-aid drinkers. Iggy's real failing is he hasn't taken the chance to fill that vaccuum himself and he won't get elected until he does so.

The list is too long. The LPOC took flak when MI noted he admired the communications strategy and discipline of the CPC.

Well, CS, sure we could talk about whether the Liberals are effectively getting their message out or connecting with the public or why are they doing poorly in the polls. If you want to change the subject of my comment, that is. We could also talk about the Raptors.